So what's your solution? Simply raising wages isn't going to fix a shortage. Raising the price on something forces people to conserve, but how do you conserve on labor besides cutting back on hours or services?
So what's your solution? Simply raising wages isn't going to fix a shortage. Raising the price on something forces people to conserve, but how do you conserve on labor besides cutting back on hours or services?
c_hawkbob wrote:Well at least you're up front about it; you only want to hear answers you agree with.
Higher wages and benefits will absolutely solve thr problem. That's why lower paying places worry over higher paying businesses moving into the area.
At the corporate level decisions have to be made to devote more to the lower end of the pay scale. It's time for that particular pendulum to swing back the other direction, the current model is unsustainable.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I doubt it is any single reason. There's a lot of going on with the re-opening. I imagine jobs will be filled as demand and supply meet. Right now people are probably able to snap up jobs that pay better, so those are going first.
My employer is having trouble finding people as well even paying well above minimum wage and paying as much or more than the COVID unemployment.
The reality is that we just re-opened. It's going to take some time for all this to get figured out. Just as the inflation is likely transitory, though maybe not given all the money circulating.
Suffice it to say Supply-Demand is going to be out of whack for a bit as things normalize. The amount of money circulating is immense. We'll have to see how well cities recover and how many businesses bring workers back to their headquarters in the city.
Many things are still up in the air. I don't expect a return to normal supply-demand and the like for 6 months to a year.
There is just so much to sort out after a year plus of lockdown. I wouldn't buy into any singular reason for labor or inflation and the like when there are a multitude of factors to consider. It's why I'm not going in heavy on stocks even with the market rising. I feel like there's going to be some nasty surprise in the economy coming from all the COVID measures that isn't being accounted for.
RiverDog wrote:I agree that there are multiple reasons for this particular labor shortage. It is more severe as a lot of people, like restaurant workers, took other jobs, left town, etc, and it will take some time for things to re-balance. But as I stated, we had a labor shortage BEFORE the pandemic, with several hundred thousand more job openings than unemployed. And not just jobs at the lower end of the wage scale. There were lots of good paying jobs, like truck drivers, construction workers, and electricians, that were having difficulty hiring new employees.
My point is that a simple raising of wages isn't going to fix the labor supply issue. All we will be doing is forcing employers to compete with each other for a fixed number of employees, robbing Peter to pay Paul, with no one to back fill positions that are vacated. Unless we somehow supplement the labor pool, either with those that are long term unemployed, encourage people to work longer before retiring, allow teenagers to do more work, etc, we will have to address the issue, or rather, the issue will address itself, on the demand side of the equation.
Although I haven't researched it lately, I saw a couple years ago, prior to the pandemic, where the average age of a licensed electrician in the United States was 56 years old. It doesn't take a brain surgeon to look at the demographical data and see the trend where those leaving the work force aren't being replaced by an equivalent number entering the labor pool.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I disagree that raising wages isn't a major part of the issue. Wages have been stagnant for years compared to the standard of living. I think even welfare is often more desirable than working at some restaurant to barely get by. There is a steep divide between jobs that pay a living wage and those that don't creating a massive underclass and a divide in income that is leading to this wealth inequality which I don't even consider caused by billionaires and millionaires competing with working class, but more with high paid tech workers competing with average to low paid working class people.
It isn't millionaires and billionaires living in the suburbs and country paying 600,000 for a house that used to cost half that much. It's high paid tech workers and finance workers making big money driving restaurant workers and working class people out of the housing market. The wage gap within the middle class is becoming more extreme than it was. It used to be you could work some middling position and make good money and live a good life. But now you have these tech workers who make in that 100k plus range easily competing in the same market as minimum mage restaurant workers with a price stratification that is pretty insane.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I definitely think wage stagnation is the problem, not a shortage of people. We have a lot of people, 330 million plus. What we don't have is jobs that pay enough to keep people in them very long and an environment that doesn't cater very well to lower income people.
Aseahawkfan wrote:So I have to heavily disagree with. Wages rising would help immensely with the labor shortage. .
c_hawkbob wrote:Holy oversimplification Batman!
"You're talking about a different, unrelated problem?!!"
I'm truly flabbergasted. If you can't see the relationship of the skyrocketing wealth growth of the uber-rich vs the decades long stagnation of the income of the working poor (the people you seem to be wanting to blame) despite huge cost of living increases across the board I can't even have this discussion with you.
You want to ascribe all of the blame for a hugely complex issue to your own single favorite scapegoat and disallow any other obviously contributing factors. That just not how the world really works. So you have at it.
RiverDog wrote:You're talking about a different, unrelated problem. Resolving an income inequity does not address a labor shortage. Unless there is a large pool of long term unemployed that a raising of wages might motivate to enter the work force, simply raising wages doesn't add workers to the work force. Although I don't necessarily disagree that income inequity is a problem that should be addressed, the issue of a labor shortage is a purely economic one.
It is an undeniable fact that we have a labor shortage. As of April 2021, there were 9.29 million unfilled job openings, and it's been steadily increasing. In May of 2021, the total number of unemployed was 2.0 million. That's a difference of some 7 million. Even if you factor in the long term unemployed, which is roughly twice that of those 'newly' unemployed, that's still a difference of some 3 million job openings.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2021/numbe ... y-2021.htm
https://www.statista.com/statistics/217 ... %20rows%20
How? Is the information I have presented wrong or unreliable? Do you have any facts that you can show that will support your assertations?
Aseahawkfan wrote:Labor shortages are necessary to drive up wages in favor of employees. So a labor shortage is not a bad thing for workers at all.
It is an undeniable fact that we have a labor shortage. As of April 2021, there were 9.29 million unfilled job openings, and it's been steadily increasing. In May of 2021, the total number of unemployed was 2.0 million. That's a difference of some 7 million. Even if you factor in the long term unemployed, which is roughly twice that of those 'newly' unemployed, that's still a difference of some 3 million job openings.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2021/numbe ... y-2021.htm
https://www.statista.com/statistics/217 ... %20rows%20
How? Is the information I have presented wrong or unreliable? Do you have any facts that you can show that will support your assertations?
Aseahawkfan wrote:Do I have facts that support my assertions? Yes. Hundreds of years of capitalism. If workers are not returning to work, then they are not doing so because wages and circumstances are not attractive enough for them to return.
Aseahawkfan wrote:On top of that, we just re-opened. These are strange circumstances, so nothing is going to respond as expected. Give the re-opening some time. Not like even if people were applying for jobs in droves that these guys would all be able to hire everyone that quickly to start with.
Sheesh. I can't stand both of these sides looking to ascribe these stupid reasons to something that is simply a matter of ,"We just re-opened fully. It will take some time to get this all reversed."
RiverDog wrote:That's not a fact and you know it. You're not that stupid. Where are all these people that will be returning to work once wages are attractive enough for them? How many of them are there? Will there be enough to fill the available job openings? Those are the facts that I'm talking about that is necessary for you to qualify your argument, not some philosophical statement about capitalism.
For the umpteenth time: WE HAD A LABOR SHORTAGE BEFORE THE PANDEMIC!
Since 2009, the ratio of unemployed people per job opening has ranged from 0.8 during 2018 and 2019 to 6.4 in July 2009, a month after the end of the most recent recession.
https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2019/numbe ... %20rows%20
.8 unemployed people per job opening in 2018 and 2019. That means that there were 20% more job openings than there were unemployed. Simply ending the pandemic isn't going to fix the problem.
Aseahawkfan wrote:For the UMPTEENTH time analyzing a labor shortage absent information like what are they paying and what jobs are open isn't good information.
RiverDog wrote:Sigh...I really wish you'd do your own homework instead of me doing it for you. All you want to do is use this forum as a place to rant, not to exchange information.
Nevertheless, here's the answer to your question.
https://www.bls.gov/charts/job-openings ... dustry.htm
Pick your category, nearly all of them have 5% of their positions unfilled. Professional and business services, 7.1%. Health care and social assistance: 6.9%. Retail trade: 5.6%. Take a look at those graphs and note the increase over the past few years.
Wages are going up, more so than prices. According to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics, in the first quarter of 2021, wages went up 40% higher than prices:
Median weekly earnings of the nation's 112.1 million full-time wage and salary workers were $989 in the first quarter of 2021 (not seasonally adjusted), the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported today. This was 3.3 percent higher than a year earlier, compared with a gain of 1.9 percent in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U) over the same period.
https://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/wkyeng.pdf
There needs to be a balance between supply and demand in order for the economy to remain healthy. At this point, demand for labor is far outpacing supply.
Aseahawkfan wrote:Another interesting question is can we even return to the previous wage levels?
Rents are rising: https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/07/09/rent-prices-rising/
Inflation is up: https://www.vox.com/the-goods/22549250/inflation-consumer-prices-lumber-used-cars-gas
Housing prices are obviously insane. Do a general search and you will see the craziest housing market since 2006 from what I have heard.
Gas prices are on the rise. You can do a search on gas prices they are rising everywhere.
We printed 35% of all money in circulation in the last year. https://techstartups.com/2021/05/22/40-us-dollars-existence-printed-last-12-months-america-repeating-mistake-1921-weimar-germany/
That begs the question is this temporary or is this a long-term change? Would workers who come back for even the $15 minimum wage be able to pay their bills?
The above is just the tip of the iceberg as far as what's occurring in the economy. It's why we need to tread carefully and be patient. The Fed Bank and Government used unprecedented measures to bolster the economy during the COVID lockdowns. It has to be sorted out carefully of we could have a crazy crash or some other issue with the economy that is unforeseen.
Wages may need to rise quite a bit to absorb the money printing and inflation that is coming and still allow people to live at even a similar level to pre-COVID. The hope is this inflation is temporary, but no one knows for sure yet how this strange mix of economic circumstances is going to play out long-term in the economy. I would be hesitant to buy into any one factor as the reason for any of this given all the factors currently affected the economy.
Best hope we have is to pray, wish, or just hope this all turns out well and we can recover quickly without some serious setbacks from all the crazy of the last year.
MackStrongIsMyHero wrote:That last paragraph is really real. I have two great uncles that became welders by trade, actually built and fished their own shrimp boat and they went in together to buy used construction equipment (a small back hoe.) if they wanted a shed, they just built it. They didn’t take stuff to mechanics or hire tradesmen unless they were absolutely certain they couldn’t learn it themselves first. Projects were just another hobby. My two uncles (their nephews) can do the same thing; they used that backhoe to help my brother change out his cracked and broke main drain pipe from this house. Saved him a bundle. Makes me feel like a turd sandwich when I feel accomplished for changing out the plumbing in my commode. And, no, didn’t have shop when I came through school. I did learn to type 60 words a minute though, lol.
But to your topic, I most certainly believe trades are hurting for the reasons you mentioned. It just isn’t considered a primary career choice. I never considered it.
NorthHawk wrote:Germany has an interesting model in that they stream people from an early age into occupations they have an interest in.
It wouldn't have worked for me, though as I didn't really know what I wanted to do and after starting in economics and working towards
an Accounting degree, I ended up in IT on the infrastructure and security side.
However, the vocational types of educational institutes have lost out in the PR game to the Universities and Colleges, but I don't know
how much demand there is for someone with a Geography degree or General Studies. On a side note before I retired 7 years ago, we
would hire people with any type of degree, but no aptitude for the job and left out people that didn't have that piece of paper but knew
a lot more about how things fit together and would be able to take courses to supplement their gaps in knowledge. That part always
baffled me. By the end of my tenure we were asking for Masters degrees and 3 or more years of experience for an entry level position.
Of course that led to a revolving door for people who would start then move on when another or better job came up.
Today we have a situation where we need Plumbers, Carpenters, Electricians, and so forth but the educational system isn't set up to
produce these types of graduates in the quantities needed. I think there has to be more emphasis on the trades in High School like
their used to be but with more advanced studies than we had. Along with adding more positions in the trade schools, this might
help give a boost to those that want to go into that type of work and help alleviate the lack of skilled workers. Companies would
love to take on an Apprentice who already knows the work and can fit in quickly and move to Journeyman status as they progress.
Hawktawk wrote:One thing about employees is more teens are working. Having not held jobs they weren't eligible for the bailouts and income replacement modifications to unemployment. On the downside they have never worked in many instances, are notoriously unreliable, especially Monday, Friday and weekends. Its why HT has been working 16 hour days trying to keep turf alive in 117% heat and then a month of 100 with water restrictions in place, working every day and still losing ground. Doesn't look promising in the near future either.
As for the current labor situation I'm torn. I think its kind of ironic when the little guys and gals, blue collar, service industry etc. get a bailout finally everyone's up in arms. Up is down these days and down is up. I care more about bailing out airlines, pumping the stock market with my great great grandkids money. I dont care if the industrious hard working people covering for labor shortages are suddenly in a sellers market and their millionaire owners with their yachts and house on a hill have to pay a little or even a lot more. Ill pay more for goods and services as my patriotic duty to keep people above poverty and keep my businesses open.
RiverDog wrote:Over the past couple of weeks, I've received two cards in the mail from the USPS saying that they're hiring. Never in my life have I ever received even one card from any government agency, outside of the military, that were advertising for employees.
I tried to call a ticket vendor to ask how to download some electronic tickets I bought and was having difficulty getting them to transfer to my phone. I got a recorded message saying that due to a shortage of personnel, that they were not fielding any calls about tickets until 3 business days prior to the event.
My former employer is now offering $1,000 sign on bonuses for entry level positions. I spent 40 years in the business, and never have I seen anyone in the industry offer sign on bonuses for any position, salaried or hourly.
The economy may be slowing down some due to the rise of the Delta variant, but this current labor market is something that I've never witnessed in my life.
c_hawkbob wrote:The bottom of the labor market, sub minimum wage farm and service jobs, as well as reasonably well paying but distasteful jobs like meat processing plants (jobs many white entry level applicants are "too good for"), is also being gutted by the immigration crackdown.
Aseahawkfan wrote:As far as discussions in the business world, the labor shortage will take months to correct for the short-term COVID caused shortage and years for the long-term general labor shortage. Hiring and training is a slow process. Jobs will be chosen by wage and capability.
I really can't even begin to explain all the factors being discussed, but I'll toss out a few:
1. No one is sure if big companies will return to the office. That means it is hard to determine if you want to re-open or maintain stores in urban areas that will no longer have the same number of employees present.
2. No one is sure the COVID restrictions are over. If we lockdown again, a bunch of hired people will have to be laid off.
3. Hiring and training takes time. You can't just quickly hire a bunch of people and toss them into the mix unless the job is extremely easy.
4. There is a tremendous amount of competition for workers right now as they move back into the work force. Best companies paying the best wage will snap people up first and it will filter down.
There are a lot of unknowns and reevaluation going on in business. For a lot of jobs that employ High Schoolers part time, their parents may not want them to work and risk COVID. So that part of he work force may be out for some time regardless of pay or unemployment. If you have older parents at home, you don't want to work in some fast food restaurant around people then bring home the bad nasty to your parents.
Until we get surety on COVID and see what the urban market demographics look like, I think it will be slow going.
Even in my buddy's industry of high paying white collar jobs in aviation, they are not hiring at a rapid pace. He still hasn't been able to get a job. For all the talk of companies looking for workers, they are moving slow about hiring and training unless it's an Amazon warehouse or something similar that is booming right now. Even they might start to slow down and lay off people if the environment normalizes and people return to normal shopping at stores.
I know trying to attribute why this is happening right now is extremely hard to do.
They just renewed the eviction ban. They don't have a clear picture of how that is affecting things and how many people are not paying rent or owe a lot of back rent.
This is going to be one crazy ride for the next year or two.
c_hawkbob wrote:I said the bottom of the labor market was being also being gutted (a thing that had been absent from this discussion) not that it was the entire issue.
RiverDog wrote:That's a pretty good summation that I mostly agree with.
But I do want to point out in the underlined portion of your comments that labor shortages will always work from the bottom up so it isn't surprising that your friend's business is relatively unaffected by the labor shortage. People at the lower end of the wage scale will migrate to the more desirable, higher paying jobs. There will always be a lot of applicants for the types of jobs that you are referring to. It's backfilling the jobs they left where the shortages will occur, and that's working its way up from the lower end into the middle income type of jobs, ie construction, truck drivers, et al.
Another part of the problem is there's a lot of single moms that can't go to work because their kids are not in school and having to attend remotely. I have several friends that I know of that are in that situation.
RiverDog wrote:Ahh, OK. I stand corrected.
I'll have to admit to a bias. I have a good fried, a "bedwetting liberal", of whom I've debated frequently with and who thinks that the solution to the labor shortage problem is simply to raise wages, in particular, the minimum wage. I have a tendency to lump you in with him, which isn't a bad thing as I have a great deal of respect for my "bedwetting" friend.
Hopefully this labor shortage is only a temporary situation of which most of pandemic related, but I have a feeling that it's going to be a problem that causes our economy to make some major re-adjustments. Fast food restaurants, unable to pay high enough to attract workers and still sell meals for under $10, might be harder to come by. Or they might be forced to invest in labor saving devices, no more human hamburger flippers, which would also cause the industry to shrink as only the high volume outlets would be able to afford such devices. If restaurants have to start paying $20/hr, then the mid range restaurants like Appleby's and Chili's might not be able to survive as instead of competing with McDonald's, they'd be competing with Red Lobster. Not too many people are going to want to pay $50 a plate for a kid's meal.
One obvious solution, obvious to me at least, would be to liberalize our immigration policy. That's the biggest single issue I had with Trump, that he demonized immigrants, characterizing them as nothing but a bunch of drug running criminals out to rape our women. That doesn't mean that I'm for open borders or abolishing ICE. We learned that lesson as a result of 9/11.
But I do think that our government should work with private industry to identify their needs then help them in procuring foreign, law abiding and preferably younger immigrants, to fill positions when there are not enough native born applicants as an option to engaging in bidding wars with other employers. Most countries have been teaching English in their schools for some time and it's becoming more the exception than the rule where an immigrant doesn't know any English, so I'm not necessarily talking about minimum wage type jobs that don't require interaction with the public.
Anyhow, we'll see how it works out.
Aseahawkfan wrote:We already do this. I'm not sure why you think we have low immigration or need liberalization. We average a million plus immigrants a year even under Trump. That is why Ann Coulter hates Trump, because he didn't do anything. His wall did nothing. His rhetoric did nothing. He did nothing to slow immigration.
Businesses already sponsor a lot of immigrants coming over to work. It's not going to change. Big business benefits from diluting the labor pool with foreign labor whether immigration or outsourcing to drive down labor costs. It's why they do it.
They literally used immigration to union break and drive down real wages for decades, which is why it is laughable that Democrat supporters think immigration is good for workers and good for their standard of living when it is heavily supported by big business because of how much they benefit from expanding the labor force to make hiring favorable for them. They complain about low taxes from Republicans, while never bothering to understand how labor works. They also complain about outsourcing, while immigration is insourcing to expand the labor pool.
It's why demonizing immigrants is stupid and distracts from what the problem is with immigration, jobs, and wages. Immigrants in general work harder for less money and buy more houses and act as better Americans than Americans in pursuing what we call the American dream. It makes life harder for lazy Americans who live here. An immigrant will work a crap job for a low wage, while working a second full time job or going to school or doing Uber to better their life while Americans complain they work too many hours for low pay.
It's a no brainer that immigrants make better workers than Americans much of the time. They come from poor countries without the opportunities they have here, so of course they're often going to outwork Americans who have grown lazy.
Immigration is a win-win-win for Big Business. And it's a lose for American workers wanting higher wages.
RiverDog wrote:Oh, I can attest to big business bringing in immigrants to break strikes and such. But that was a practice made popular back in the 60's and 70's when a rich E. Washington farmer could go down to Texas and haul up a couple hundred migrants to work as scabs at his processing plant, something I witnessed first hand. Those type of practices don't happen anymore. Furthermore, I'm not talking about bringing up immigrants to pick apples or cut asparagus. I'm talking about businesses, with the aid of the Federal Government and after having proven that they've exhausted the domestic labor pool, going on recruiting trips, putting on job fairs in foreign countries, etc.
One of the problems with our work force is that it is old and with the continuing decline in the birth rate in this country, will continue to age for at least the next twenty years. That does not bode well for socialized systems, everything from health insurance to pensions to SS and Medicare, that depends on active workers contributing to the welfare of the older and retired ones. On the other end of the scale, life expectancy (with the exception of this year and the Covid deaths) has been on a steady increase. If something isn't done to reverse the trend, but 2034, there will be two workers to every one that's drawing Social Security. Something will have to give, either a massive tax increase to support SS/Medicare or a major cut in benefits, two very unpopular choices.
Immigrants tend to be younger, mostly in their 20's and 30's, more likely to pay into insurance plans and less likely to need medical care than a 50 something year old worker. I don't see any viable solution other than just let the economy shrink, let inflation run rampant, and watch those wage increases get wiped out by higher prices.
Aseahawkfan wrote:And they aren't as electronically addicted and lazy as younger Americans today. I've never seen a group of people so electronically addicted and lazy than modern young Americans. The smartphone is basically The Matrix to them. They're like drooling electronically connected zombies who can use any of their portable games anywhere on their phone or using a wifi connection so their video games, talking, and texting can be done anywhere at any time. They have so little discipline to shut it off and do their job. I walk into fast food places and see these people on their phone. Where if you have more immigrants working, many of them are actually working and doing the job.
Aseahawkfan wrote:I remember when the T.V. was viewed as this thing turning everyone into zombies, but the TV is marijuana and the Smartphone is heroin. Smartphone definitely zombifying this generation and all future generations. Electronic addiction is real.
RiverDog wrote:IMO there's a very close relationship between being addicted to the television for my generation and various electronic devices for the succeeding ones. I remember my mom having to tape a piece of paper over the wall clock as at 6:00pm, it didn't matter if we were finished with our dinner or not, we made a beeline for the TV so we could watch Huckleberry Hound. They couldn't get us to do our homework, couldn't get us out of the house to do our chores, etc. A friend of mine, despite being a very good player, quit the jr. high baseball team so he could come home after school and watch Dark Shadows. Hell, even in college, I remember dumping a date off early so I could get back to my apartment in time to watch SNL. The girls in my generation were just as bad, except their vice was the telephone.
Each generation has a big complaint about the habits and addictions of the succeeding ones. With my parents generation, with them growing up in the late 20's and 30's, it was the radio, us baby boomers it was the TV, Gen X video games/arcades, Millennials cell phones.
Aseahawkfan wrote:It's the portability and access everywhere via wifi that makes the smartphone worse.
At least you couldn't carry your TV and girls couldn't carry their phone everywhere. Now they can. Imagine being able to watch Dark Shadows anywhere at any time or SNL clips all day long.
Now they're working brain implants. We're literally building ourselves a matrix. Humans are always looking at external enemies to fight, but they are their own worst enemy. We're literally screwing ourselves over. A movie about the real problem with humanity would consist of one group of humans doing things to screw over other humans while making it look like it is a good idea.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 18 guests